Proposed electoral reforms: Increase voting age to 25, new age range for elective positions
Our past is haunted by mistakes. The mistake of infighting among revolutionary leaders that led to the execution of Andres Bonifacio. The mistake of signing the Pact of Biak-na-Bato with Spain who later sold us to the Americans for $20 million. The mistake of collaborating with Japanese invaders until the Americans returned and gave us independence under Filipino leadership. The mistake of infighting (again) among Filipinos that resulted in the martial law years.
And the ongoing mistake of electing leaders from a coterie of well-known personalities: with dynastic interests, with perceived heroic attributes, with rallying social causes, and from all of them, their promises of changing the lives of ordinary citizens.
It is time to redirect our future by daring to be different.
The first contentious task: For 75 percent of Congress to specifically amend the constitutional age of voters from 18 to 25 years old. In the distant past, voting started at 21. This was lowered to 18. Nowadays, the K-12 curriculum means that the youth (defined by the United Nations as 15 to 24 years old) are still in college. On the other hand, the undereducated may be caught up in job training and contractual work. Do they have the time to think through their choices of leaders?
The second debatable effort: Pass a simple law prohibiting political dynasties and defining “nonconsecutive term of office.” Any elective position will have unlimited reelection bids (including the presidency) provided that the incumbent official will skip the election period immediately after his/her term of office. During the interim (sabbatical) period, direct family members are prohibited from running as candidates for the vacated position. However, the direct family members are allowed to run for and win other elective positions.
The third difficult goal: For 75 percent of Congress to specifically amend the constitutional ages of candidates for elective positions. To assume a national elective office, the candidate must be at least 40 to 65 years old. To assume a local elective office, the minimum should be 30 to 55 years old.
In conclusion, our past leaders drove the Philippines down to No. 7 out of 10 in the 2023 Asean rankings. More than enough Filipinos have opted to migrate for well-paid jobs or immigrate for better lifestyles. A major reason: to escape a life of toil and instability. A major cause: the failure of elective officials to follow through with their promises. To use as an excuse the short terms of office doesn’t cut it anymore.
It is time to lay the foundations for new leaders to emerge from the shackles of anonymity. It is time to consider new leaders for elective positions based on their track record of changing the communities they live in and bringing success to the projects that they have worked on.
Enough of the brash and menacing demeanor, enough of the convoluted legalese, and enough of the lavish rhetoric that peppers government’s engagements. The Filipino deserves a fair, just, and reliable government to achieve economic progress and sociopolitical strength.
Fe F. Obana, senior citizen
